Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Lost Woods
Full Member
Registered: 03/11/13
Posts: 105
Loc: The Netherlands

Yeah that's a nice class did that one and still improvising on it. The good about it is that u only have 1 "chord" and 1 "scale". Somehow I find it hard top improv over for example a 2-5-1 in min. Let's say for example 2-5-1 in D minor played as:E-b5, A7b9b13, D-. Now we have for each chord another "basic" scale if I'm right (ofcourse one can play any scale if he wants to..). This will be: E Locrian #2, A Super Locrian, D dorian. Cause these have other notes it seems like my ear refuses to accept that there are 3 different scales played in one 2-5-1... while in a maj 2-5-1 one can use the same scale (in case you don't play the 1 lydian) cause the Major 1 scale gives you 2 Dorian and 5 mixolydian.

Anyway, talking about scales quick question. If you think for example of C min 7 b 5. You can think of a scale from C (locrian #2 mode) or melodic minor from Eb. Is there any reason not to think as in melodic minor from Eb.. because that's much easier. As you can also use your melodic minor scales for other chords like C7b9b13 one can start melodic minor from Db in stead of thinking "1 b2 b3 3 b5 b6 b7".

At the jazz camp I attend, the pianist teaches just that:Over half diminished, play melodic minor a minor third up.Over altered dominant, play melodic minor a half step up.Over regular dominant, play melodic minor a fifth up (lydian dominant).

That system never worked for me, but if it's easier for you it is clearly a good way to go.

practice minor 251s in one key at a time, maybe 15 mins each key.do it for 6 keys:c d e f g athose are the keys most common unless you will play with a singer, but even then, you should be able to fall within those keys. practice improvising with mostly 8th notes, at about 72 bpmthen you can record and share.

when u have major 251 in 12 keys and minor in 6, you just need to add the occasional dominant chord and you're set for 80÷ of real book tunes.

Lost Woods
Full Member
Registered: 03/11/13
Posts: 105
Loc: The Netherlands

Thx I'll try that. Though still thinking my lines don't make any sense lol.But with harmomic minor you mean over 2-5-1 in C for example, C harmonic minor?Will work for 2 and 5 so thanks for that but for 1? The Ab and G don't go together and B and Bb will neither..?

no bbb natural will work great. you can voice your c minor with either a or b.c harm minor will work just fine.also use a lot of arpeggios. 1357 and 3579.then your lines will make sense. later you will add melodic minor and all sorts of stuff, but harmonic minor is a simple way to navigate the minor 251s.

Lost Woods
Full Member
Registered: 03/11/13
Posts: 105
Loc: The Netherlands

Thanks again.Mayb I'll post a little practice vid soon so some of you can see what I do (and don't) know. Cause you see me firing questions in this thread at will without knowing where I'm at Only thing holding me back playing much is this elbow/underarm injury which is taking looong time. So only practice very short sessions lately.

Personally I don't think it is necessary. Or beneficial for that matter. Jazz is a musical style that is so far removed from classical that IMHO the jazz piano is a different instrument altogether.I have been a jazz player for 35 years, have never had more than a passing desire to play anything else. From what I have learned I would say that jazz is conceptually different. It presents a series of challenges that playing classical music just does not prepare one to do.And visa versa. Improvising over the most demanding chord progressions will not prepare a person for the complexities of classical music.Finally, for my ear, and for want of a better word, most classical pianists that transition to jazz sound a little too white bread. And I want the bourbon and beans, man!

I think you`re right here. I don`t know of anybody who can do both to a state of excellence. But I bet there`s somebody out there . .

I did listen to a 9yo boy who was playing advanced classics. I mentioned this "broadeing of his horizons" subject as tactly as I could, on Youtube. His proud mother, she told me he already did . . . .!

_________________________
"I'm playing all the right notes � but not necessarily in the right order." Eric Morecambe

Lost Woods
Full Member
Registered: 03/11/13
Posts: 105
Loc: The Netherlands

Am I right if I say Brubeck is switching here between F- and A- keys?And if it's true, is there a certain reason this works so well? Sounds great, as my leadsheet is in E- (and I know the tune in E-) I have to switch beteween E- and Ab- or C- and E- I guess?

About classical music and jazz ... an observation is many fabulous jazz pianists studied classical music extensively. The thing is, the piano has history (and techniques that accumulate in that history) across several hundred years. Most of those techniques come from the classical tradition. Barry Harris, Fred Hersch, and Ethan Iverson still study with Sophia Rosoff. Madame Chaloff, in Boston, was the gateway to technique for several generations of pianists including Steve Kuhn, Jaki Byard, Kenny Werner, Hal Galper and a million others. Bill Evans was once quoted as saying something like "Bach will straighten you out quickly!" Keith Jarrett and Chick Corea have recorded classical repertoire. Herbie Hancock's mentioned many times that Ravel has been one of his major influences. Oscar Peterson and Paul Bley had very intensive classical training, as did Richie Beirach. There are a million others with this kind of experience as well. And Hal Galper wrote in one of his books that there's no real difference between jazz and classical technique.

So, all of that said ... it's up to any us as to what we might do all the techniques and styles and approaches the piano allows. In a totally different art form Bruce Lee said something like "Use what's useful and disgard the rest!" How we interpret that is up to us!

Looks like just starting off with a chord on every beat? And later on jump between root and chord or something like that? It doens't sound too hard but therefore it's really nice for the ear I think especially with the block chord style of playing in the right hand.

Lost Woods
Full Member
Registered: 03/11/13
Posts: 105
Loc: The Netherlands

Originally Posted By: knotty

LW,

He's using 4 to the bar, like you say chord on each beat, playing with time in the RH. Check out Erroll Garner for some great examples of this. Sometimes also using a technique called "Faux Stride".

Dave Frank describes both in his video on advanced LH techniques.

Thx I've watched it before and watching it again. Very useful video it is. What I do see and was wondering about back then was: Dave Frank is using certain "inversions" of chords or even changing chords. Is there a certain rule about this? Cause with him is sounds great. I see him make switches between C-7 and C-6 for instance.. it's not just "4 beats same chord" somehow he's mixing it up, cause on the lead sheet there is C-7 for 8 beats which would sounds repetitive if I play it.

Maybe odd question but does anyone know a pianist who's solo's are like chet baker? Cause I like his solo flows a lot sometimes much more than the "see how many notes I can fit in my solo" style of approach a lot of pianist happen to have. I know it's another instrument but still...

Btw I lend this "Solo Jazz Piano, The Linear Approach" book from the library.. can't wait to start with it

Lost Woods ... looking at horn player for piano inspiration is a great thing to do! If you get the Hal Leonard Chet Baker Artist Transcriptions and play the solos (all of them) along with the original recordings, you'll end up knowing how to play more or less like Chet Baker. That's probably a great idea for exactly the reason you mention.

The transcriptions, I'm sure, are in Bb. But with Transcribe can you can adjust the key of the recordings - so your piano can match to the transcriptions.

The goal would be to play the transcriptions up to speed and as close in phrasing as you can to the recording. Or you could sing the transcriptions instead of playing them. Or play AND sing.

The traditional way is transcribe the solos yourself. That said, the book gives you a lot of solos and really, the most important thing is get them in your ear. Learning EVERY solo in the book may sound excessive but it will teach you a lot about CB's style.

As you learn the solos play them at any tempo or out of tempo or whatever's helpful ... Play them w/your LF etc. The important thing: Get them lodged and stuck in your ears!

>>Cause with him is sounds great. I see him make switches between C-7 and C-6 for instance..LW, most of the time, you'll try to create some variety with the thumb. That creates a bit of counter melody. It doesn't have to be complicated, but just simple step or half step movement will provide some interest.

Don't try to play as fast as DF is playing there, bring it way down. 72-80bpm is a good tempo to start. If you can control great at that tempo, bringing up to 160 will be no sweat. But if you can't play slow, you'll never really get to fix it at the faster tempos.

Lost Woods
Full Member
Registered: 03/11/13
Posts: 105
Loc: The Netherlands

Thanks again I think I'm figuring this thing called jazz piano out bit by bit with thanks to you all. The main problem I had was that I didn't know what inversion to play but with help of the first chapter "Solo Jazz Piano, The Linear Approach" book I know which register is best for laying down the chords.

Lost Woods
Full Member
Registered: 03/11/13
Posts: 105
Loc: The Netherlands

Little up: In the Solo Jazz Piano book from Neil Omstead, the 2-5-1.. the 2 in minor 2-5-1 is played RH as: 3,b5,7,1 with 1 as LH bass. Does anyone know why it isn't extended with a 9 or b9? Cause I'm used to playing the 2 with a 9 or b9.. this approach is new to me. In the major 2-5-1 the book tells u to play the 2min with 3-5-7-9 (so with the 9, as I'm used to do).

So for example in the book:A-7b5 = A-Eb-G-A

I don't understand why this is used for the 2 in minor 2-5-1 cause the book tells about extensions and applies it to the other chords.

Lost Woods, the information in books are maybe best described as guidelines based on what the author has found to be helpful. Sometimes what the author sees as helpful is something that can be described easily in the form of a rule. But rules, wherever they appear are just descriptions of common practice. As in "Bill Evans did it this way" or "Bud Powell did it that way."

Bottom line with all of this: Use your ear and experience! If books don't say anything about 9ths or other upper structures but your ear and experience tell you those things work and sound good. Well, in that case you've found real differences between learning from books and learning from experience. In the olden days, before all of the books we have now, learning from experience was the ONLY way!

I'm not at all saying that books aren't helpful or that learning from experience is the only way. Actually, if you look at a lot of books instead of only a few you'll start to see what's common to them all and what's unique to particular authors. And you may also start to recognise stuff that many authors omit. For one reason or another.

Maybe the best books of all are transcriptions of pianists. Because then, instead of reading someone's observations on Bill Evans or Dave McKenna or whomever (in the form of a rule or a guideline), you can just go right to the original source. Although in the olden days, those books didn't exist so anyone who wanted to learn this stuff transcribed it from records or stood behind a pianist to hear and see what they where doing (I was fortunate to be able to do that quite a bit with Dave McKenna and looking back at it, he never once asked anyone not to stand behind him!)

Jim McNeely explains how and why Dizzy Gillespie (and Barry Harris) advocate the natural 9 on top of a ii min7 flat5 chord. If you visit that page, do a search on Gillespie to find the passage. JM explains that DG heard ii minor 7 flat5 as a iv triad over it's 6th. So, in Cm, a D min7 flat 5 is an Fm triad over a D. For DG, that meant an E natural is/was THE note that sits on top of the F min triad (in C minor).

An example: Gigi Gryce's tune Minority where the melody note over ii minor 7 flat 5 is a natural 9th. And in John Mehegan's books (where so-called "A" and "B" voicings get their names), the natural 9 is in the ii minor 7 flat5 voicings.

There are also, of course, plenty of counter examples where a b9 and not a natural 9 goes over the ii minor 7 flat 5 chord. Almost always b9, if there, is part of a RH (or melody) line - rather than in a voicing.

So I'm w/Knotty: unless you go to an "old-style" source like Dizzy Gillespie or Barry Harris or John Mehegan, or unless you actually transcribe passages where this stuff exists (or get transcriptions out of a book) you're not going to get a "straight" answer! Actually, another place to look for answers is in the Charlie Parker Omnibook, which really is a Bible of what's possible.

Lost Woods
Full Member
Registered: 03/11/13
Posts: 105
Loc: The Netherlands

That's some great information guys The reason why I asked is because I wanted to know if there was like a "standard" how to practice these 2-5-1's in a practice routine.. but looks like it depends, so gotta know all options. Think I'll just practice the (3,b5,b7,1) one day, next day with 9 etc. until I'm good with all of them.

Some more detail, detail. The Gary Burton approach is interesting because it might be described as "old school" in the sense of "know the original way before you even think about modifying it." That puts it in league somewhat w/the ("old-school") spirit of the Gillespie & Harris idea of ii minor 7 b5 being a iv triad (F minor) over a sixth (D).

In What is This Thing Called Love for the first 4 bars, Cole Porter originally wroteC7 | | F min | |

The melody for WITTCL doesn't include a natural 9 or a b9. So prior knowledge of the tune doesn't help in this case with a choice in this case. And then, often as not, the Gm7b5 gets turned into a dominant chord with extensions. When that happens the b9 IS usually there.

In the Bill Evans transcription of Autumn Leaves (the one that's available in a few books ... or if you listen to it) you'll find Bill either plays NOTHING in the LH where the Am7b5 goes. Or he sometimes plays a G and C (the seventh and third of Am7b5) or G, C, and Eb (which some might say verifies the DG and BH theories). Sometimes Bill turns the Am7b5 into a dominant chord w/alterations. So his practice suggests at least three possibilities. Further you look at the lines he plays over those chords, you'll see a lot of Bb (the b9 of the Am7b5 chord).

If you look/listen at Herbie Hancock's version of Autumn Leaves (transcribed by Bill Dobbins) you'll find some REALLY interesting variants. For some Am7b5 places, Herbie plays an F and Bb (from bottom to top) in the LH and D and Eb and G (bottom to top) in the RH. That's a pretty common HH sound from MD and Blue Note days - you'll hear that kind of approach with McCoy Tyner as well.

Continue through HH's Autumn Leaves solo and things get even more interesting. Sometimes he uses a blatant Am7 where the the Am7b5 would go - actually that's pretty common with HH. He'll frequently transform min7b5 chords into min7 chords. In that case the fifth becomes an E rather than an Eb and it makes sense to use the natural 9 rather than b9. Herbie does A LOT with those kinds of ambiguities.

I know this is a lot to write about two "little" notes ... B or Bb .... but there's a lot of interesting jazz practice stuff bound up in that tiny and sometimes inconsequential choice and some of that practice makes a huge impact on how your ear might ear this stuff and therefore what you might (or might not) play.

printer1, which version of Autumn Leaves was that HH transcription? I just saw HH last Tuesday and what he was playing were the same figures he used in a live version of AL I've posted frequently. I really would like to understand everything he does.

BTW I always tend to use natural 9 on half-dim unless the melody suggests otherwise. I think it has a more interesting sound/color. It's what I was taught. b9 tended to be used in the older styles of jazz. There's a little discussion of it in Mark Levine's book (he goes for Nat 9 as well).

Jazzwee, I'm gonna guess the Bill Dobbins transcription (published by Advance Music if you want that bit) is from a recording called "Miles Davis in Berlin" or from "Miles Davis at Antibes" or possibly from "Miles Davis in Tokyo."

Just a little more about that b9 vs. natural 9 thing. You say "b9 tended to be used in older styles of jazz." Well, you're probably right. But Dizzy G and Barry H, since the 1940's have that theory (Barry Harris has explained it in particular) where the 9 on iimin7b5 is natural and not flat. So that's going back pretty far to the time when upper extensions were becoming part of the common language.

Red Garland: on What is This Thing Called Love - he play Eb over one Dm7b5 and he plays E natural over the next Dm7b5. And he outlines the opening chord (which is most commonly Gm7b5) very clearly as a G min 7 (no flat 5).

Herbie, in Autumn Leaves (and really McCoy Tyner's style), where he voices a chord in 4ths including a b9 over the Amin7b5 - well, that modal approach to that chords w/ voicings in 4ths is very common.

It's worth pointing out that basic voice leading has a big role in all of this. Because the DG/BH school of "always the natural 9" or other approaches of "look at the source material to know which one to use" in my opinion treat chords and lines as static things over which other things get piled up. So-called chord scale theory is similar in in that sense ... ("put that scale over that chord or put this scale over this chord!")

But there is a sense of voice leading and counterpoint in jazz, just as there is in classical music. Through voice leading and counterpoint, any of the chords we're discussing are fluid , flexible and highly-changeable and subject to extensive alterations . Which means which notes get played for one chord or another depend on a larger sense of what's going on in the music than just a note over a chord according to some rule or another. A concrete example might be something like Bill Evans where the b9 shows up over the a iim7b5 because the larger context is b9 is a minor third in the overall key and the iim7b5 sort of points to a minor key and ....

Play the opening melody of What is this Thing over the example and try it perhaps w/a bass player. Its dissonant (and maybe it lives best in a Richie Bierach / Dave Liebman kind of style) but also ... (fill in the blank w/your own description). If you do fill in the blank be kind